About your Search

20121108
20121116
STATION
MSNBC 17
MSNBCW 17
CNN 5
CNNW 5
CSPAN 4
CSPAN2 2
CNBC 1
FBC 1
KGO (ABC) 1
KPIX (CBS) 1
WGN (CW) 1
WTTG 1
WUSA (CBS) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 63
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 63 (some duplicates have been removed)
from mitch mcconnell. he put out a statement. he's still minority leader. he left no doubt republicans will not be cooperating. it reads in part, the voters have not endorsed the failures or excesses of the president's first term. they have simply given him more time to give him the job they asked him to do together with the congress that restored balance. he's basically saying we won, you won. this is going to be a fight. i didn't see a lot of hope in that for negotiation. >> not only that, he started on a very -- hey, don't offer us anything that can't pass the house of representatives. >> what's that mean? >> well, that means we're starting from square one, apparently. john boehner today, he wants to not have any grand bargain before the end of the year. wants to do this -- they're just buying time. it will be interesting -- i'll be curious to see how the white house now reacts. you've got boehner and mcconnell, boehner is playing good cop, seems more conciliatory. mcconnell less so. mcconnell has a political squeeze happening on him because he's up for re-election in 2014. two thin
get a different phenomenon. mitch mcconnell took a much harder line, and it really was he has a mandate for his failed policies. that is not what this election was about. anything that happens now has to meet the approval of the house republicans or it is not going anywhere. that i think is in many ways also a false bluster, because what we see going on in the senate is roiling change that mcconnell does not necessarily control, which is 48 senators from across the board working with the fix-the-debt coalition, and the business community to come up with a simpson-bowles template. there will not be a plan. >> what you see is the scenario? >> especially on the fiscal cliff? >> you will not see much difference between this on this. mort, i think it is impossible to write serious law during a lame duck that would constitute an agreement with any substance other than, and something set up behind them once again, to go into the fact if the next congress does not actually produce them. but the idea that they could do something that delivers on the promise of tax reform, which, when y
mitch mcconnell was the number one obstructionist in the president's first term. now he tells "the wall street journal" he'll do whatever it takes to get a deal. i'd be willing to pay the ransom if e we thought we were going to get the hostage out. but the hostage is what? entitlement spending. mcconnell's intention, he's willing to agree to a dollar of new taxes for every dollar in cuts. what a difference an election makes. >> i'm going to ask a question on the stage. they seau had a real spending cuts deal, 10 to 1. spending cuts to tax increases. spooker, you're already shaking your head. but who on this stage would walk away from that deal? would you raise your hand about not raising taxes. >> remember in 2011 republicans would not take a 10 to 1 tax cut deal? now today mitch mcconnell is willing to do a 1 to 1 deal. republicans lost all of their leverage in this election. they made a big gamble and came up empty handed. in 2011 president obama was cutting deals with john boehner on the golf course. it was very favorable for the republicans. the president agreed to more than $1.2 tr
done, much more so than mitch mcconnell, if he can get a deal done in the first six months, he's got health reform and putting the nation's fiscal house in order for the next three, four, five generations as the signature achievement already of his second term, that puts you in the league of some of the most successful presidents in our history. those are huge, big-time -- those are big-time accomplishments. >> he's got the opportunity. >> yes, that's what i'm saying. the door is open for him. >> he is going to have to strike some deals. >> he is. >> and he's going to have to make some grand alliances. >> i don't know anyone who knows speaker boehner who doesn't say a couple of things about him. one, pretty good guy. >> handsome. handsome. >> two, can cut a deal. knows how to cut a deal. and three, from that clip, joe, a guy who knows that he is one of the point people in leading a renewal of the republican party. he's got to cut a deal. he's got to cut a deal. >> but he doesn't have to cut a deal. that's the point and that's what the president and that's what the white house needs t
also speak to senator mcconnell? >> i did not speak to senator mcconnell. i did, however, speak to senator blunt who's the second leader in the republican caucus , and we had a very good conversation. so, yes, i did not talk to senator mcconnell, did talk to senator blunt. also heard from senator corker, johanns, who was a colleague of mine as governor, and a number of other republicans, but the -- the conversation with the republican leadership was with senator blunt. >> why weren't you able to talk with him? >> i'm sorry? >> why didn't you talk with senator mcconnell? >> he didn't contact me. >> what rule, if any, is the negative 'tising that republicans -- advertising that republicans and -- >> i can honestly look you in the eye and say zero. that's history. >> [inaudible] >> the question was what influence, if any, did president obama's victory have? i don't think it had a significant influence. my real focus was, as i mentioned, two issues -- independence and ability to be effective on behalf of maine. i understand senator reid is here. he wants to see what i've said. senat
. the should be enough to deny president obama a mandate. mitch mcconnell made a statement saying the voters have not endorsed the failures or successes, simply given him more time to finish the job they asked him to do, together with a congress that restored balance to washington after two years of one-party control. now, not so fast. the actual number of votes cast for house seats favored the democrats by a half a million votes. this is no man dade for house republicans, but of course they're trying to swing a big stick again. there's a reason. republicans were able to capture more house seats with a majority of the vote. for example, look at pennsylvania in 2008. take a good look. where is the red? a lot of blue district, right? take a look at pennsylvania in 2012. wow. what happened? there's a lot more red. it's because democratic districts have been jerry mandered into unwinnable seats. you know, those republicans are pretty slick. reliability blue districts in the southwestern and southeastern part of pennsylvania were combined into comfortable red districts. real clear politics report
out maybe one year ago. and mitch mcconnell buried it. he did not want the information known. the news report is out there. i am sure you can find it. but mitch mcconnell was the one that buried it in did not want that publicly known that it is a fallacy. i want to ask, especially you, mr. representative, the last two years since you people have taken over, you have barely showed up for work. we are paying your salary. i do not see not one of you put any skin in this game. you are sitting there, you do not even show up for work for half of the two years of taken over. we are paying your salary, paying your benefits. i do not see you putting in the skin in the game. my my husband has been a steel worker. he has to work 60-to-80 hours a week. this notion of the 47% not paying taxes, and entitlement, my husband has been paid in into his benefits for 40 years. host: we will have the congressman respond, but let me ask you a question, what you think of increase in the age of people qualifying for medicare or social security? caller: my husband has been a steelworker for 37 years. my husband
direction to go. if jim demint ends up taking a leadership job in this republican party, or mitch mcconnell stays there, the way mitch mcconnell is talking right now, i think it means they haven't learned these lessons and aiming at something other than a majority. they're aiming at something else. >> that used to be, to take that job, running the party campaign committee is a career-making step in washington. and i think there was a report today, supposedly, marco rubio was being talked about, to run the committee for the republicans in the next cycle, that has no interest in doing it. you can't recruit candidates and say, we're going to put our support behind you. they're going to still lose the primary. >> it's a lose/lose situation in terms of those internal dynamics. steve kornacki, ow also seem very spry today, like ed. >> lots of caffeine. i'm going to crash this weekend. >> i understand. all right. thanks, steve. >>> all right, so, how did the unfortunate comments about rape caucus do in last night's elections? surprisingly poorly. that very cheery story is coming up next. so you sa
mitch mcconnell. that's called failing up, which is amazing on its own terms. but we should also wonder if that's instructive for how the republican party is going to deal with the overall question of who their leader is and what they stand for. "the washington post" reporting today that the republican party is going to undertake an internal review of what went wrong on tuesday. reportedly take place over the next few weeks and months. spear headed by the republican party. the goal of the review is to determine what went so wrong and how to fix it. good idea. let's review. it's a good idea because the informal process so far of the right trying to figure out what went wrong, that process so far is not going well. republicans have so far decided that hurricane sandy is the reason mitt romney lost. they have also decided that fact checking is the reason mitt romney lost. karl rove said it's democratic voter suppression is the reason mitt romney lost. there's also a blog post, a piece of comedy written about military votes not being counted. that got the right skpieted that that was the re
to be the number two republican in the whole senate right behind mitch mcconnell. and that is calling failing up. which is amazing on its own terms. in terms of republicans in the senate. i think we also should wonder if that is instructive for how the republican party is going to deal with the overall question of who their leader is and what they stand for after this electoral drubbing they took in this week's election. "the washington post" reporting today that the republican party is going to undertake a big internal review of what went wrong on tuesday. reportedly take place over the next few weeks and months. spearheaded by republican party national officials. the goal of the review is to determine, quote, what went so wrong and how to fix it. good idea. yeah. let's review. it's a good idea because the informal process so far of the right trying to figure out what went wrong for republicans this election, that informal process so far is not going well. republicans have so far decided that hurricane sandy is the reason mitt romney lost. they have also decided that fact checking is the reason
's under way. the election was just yesterday. let's look at mitch mcconnell, the leader of the republicans in the senate. he's got a reelection in 2014. does he cooperate because he's up for reelection or does he not cooperate because he's worried about a conservative primary challenge? john boehner, the house leader, he might want to cooperate but he's got 230 plus republicans all of whom are taking a different message from this election, some of whom were reelected because they said they don't want to cooperate. the president's motivation, he wants to get this so-called fiscal cliff out of the way so he can work on the bigger issues nancy talked about: energy, immigration. so that's what motivates him. in the end, the players didn't change. the question is whether their motivations did. >> pelley: john, thank you very much. the big story in the northeast wasn't politics today but the nor'easter that just blew in. the same places that were swamped by sandy are getting lashed tonight by high winds, rain, snow, and an angry sea that threatens to flood the shoreline all over again. more evac
-term president will he do that even though there appears to be a melting at the moment? >> mr. mcconnell obviously failed in making him a one-term president now he faces reelection two years from now in 2014 and he is afraid of palm... he will have more pressure to be more conservative now but at the same time he is the republican leader he has to produce something some of the t partiers are not going back like joe walsh in the house and others are really at a point where these people ask what are you doing down there? i think we're going to see some changes. to think things may change >> he was harking back to his lovely days of no rights states no blue states we knew that wasn't true when he said it bought it sounds good he is aspiring once again and he can be very inspiring. he needs people to watch his back i think. with the election over wall street today the dow jones industrial average 313 points we are left wondering how the president is going to negotiate the biggest issue facing the u.s. economy as clarence pointed out the fiscal cliff tax hikes automatically go into effect ja
and then the new congress will have to fix it. mitch mcconnell will head up the republican side and he's very clear about taxes. one issue i never have been conflicted about was taxings. i wasn't sent to congress to raise taxs and this election doesn't change my principles it is clear if the president of the united states want to get something done he has to do it with no new taxings. read the republicans new lips. no new you whan? >> by the way. the president has more incentive to not rae taxes. the nonpartisan congressional budget said tax hikes with the spending cuts would the count rope back in a recession and they predict unemployment would increase to 9.1 percent. if there is any inducement to get it done. it is the cbo. >> brian: people forget tax cuts are involved and not just budget cuts. take a look at surveillance pictures. f.b.i. accounts this is it. ak 47 bandit that struck this time in idaho. he used assault rifle and ordered employees in to the vault and then made off with cash. he is wanted for robbing banks in california and washington. one of those robberies an officer was shot. a
with john boehner, the senate republican leader mitch mcconnell. is he planning on sitting down with those two republican leaders any time soon? is the white house saying? >> reporter: there's nothing announced for a leaders meeting so far. but i am certain, wolf, that that will be coming because there's such important negotiations ahead. i'm told that the president's conversation with speaker boehner was courteous, it was brief. and i'm told that they also discussed the importance of keeping their public statements vague or general enough so that they leave themselves enough private negotiating room to get a deal done to avoid the fiscal cliff, wolf. >> that's probably smart too. thanks very much for that, jessica. let's dig a little bit deeper right now with our chief political analyst gloria borger. isn't his responsibility right now though to take the first step, offer a proposal to boehner, to mcconnell, to the republicans? we assume that the democrats, nancy pelosi would go along and harry reid would go along with the president. >> well, i think as jessica's saying, the president bel
, mcconnell no longer wakes up and goes to sleep thinking i'm going to make this guy a one-termer and obama no longer thinks -- >> i hope you're right. >> he doesn't need to be reelected and mcconnell, the republicans don't need to keep him from being -- so both sides are in a position, that's what you're saying. >> joe, neither you nor i are as rich as governor romney so we can't bet $10,000 but i bet $1. >> wait a second. that's a cheap shot and i am nowhere near as rich but i'll bet you, i don't have to double what you're worth to get to romney. >> i don't -- >> see! >> ralph we cut you off before, you said there were three bs, the first was big, the second was balance. >> the second was balance between taxes and here again, let's talk a little bit about balance first, okay? because you have this massive schism between what's balanced. if you look at 2:1 or 3:1 or 4:1. >> in terms of spending cuts versus revenue raised. >> spending cuts versus revenue raised, 2:1 to 3:1, sounds like a massive gap. if it's 2:1, it's two-thirds expense reductions and one-third tax increase
of posturing. but it certainly was a much different tone, for instance, than what came out of mitch mcconnell's office office the election, and we've plowed through that plenty. i think what you're going to see now is the white house wants to attack a little bit of time, be thoughtful how public -- what they say publicly versus how much maneuverer ability is there. the other unnamed player is chuck shumer. chuck schumer publicly said i like simpson bowls in the it made an effort but i don't like what they're trying to do with taxes. we can't do this with tax reform. taxes should go up. he wants to move the negotiating position on the democrats in a little bit of a different direction. so what president obama has to navigate is that politics a lit bit in the senate. senate democrats more emboldened. they netted some seats. they didn't just hold their majority. they got a stronger majority. >> right. >> so i think before he goes out too publicly he's got make sure -- the white house has to make sure they're on the same page as harry reid and vice versus, i think that's why there's a little bit
time, we are going to be intransigent, mitch mcconnell's first statement after the election of president obama was clear was not a very conciliatory statement. >> see, i don't think that the american public are going to wear any more of this from the republicans. it's not just their fault. the democrats have been just as much to blame in terms of poor negotiation but there comes a point when the republicans have been rejected, they have lost this lelection and they have to face their own demons. governor, unless i'm wrong here, you guys have the upper hand now, don't you? and you can do exactly what dan said. you can shove the foot, the size 9s, straight on the adam's apple and say we are getting stuff done for the benefit of america and if you stop us, we are going to make it clear you've done that against the interests of your country. >> well, i think some of that is right, piers. i would put it a little bit differently. i agree with both you and dan in terms of democrats generally and the president in particular having leverage right now, because he's had his policy choi
and some republicans. now we need a majority in congress to listen. >> mitch mcconnell didn't give mr. obama a mandate. they just gave him more time' and speaker boehner still objects to higher tax rates, shepard. >> shepard: republicans here and there are changing their tunes on a lot of things. bill kristol the conservative commentator is one of them, he says raise taxes on the millionaires it won't kill us that shook the g.o.p. establishment. he supports the president's own deficit reduction commission taxes and spending cuts which mr. obama himself turned down. crystal's comments came on "fox news sunday." >> you know what? it won't kill the country if we raise taxes a little bit on millionaires. it really won't. i don't understand why republicans don't take obama's offers to freeze taxes on everybody below 250,000. >> since polls indicate most people favor phasing out he upper income tax cuts. kristol ask why should republicans fall on swords for a bunch of millionaires who half of them live in hollywood and vote democratic anyway. two states have responded to make it legal to sm
've heard or if you've heard anything from senator mcconnell and what you think his role in this is going to be and -- [inaudible] >> well, i would hope that he and speaker boehner, in most things they work together, and i guess on fiscal reform senator -- speaker boehner has taken the lead. but my view is if, that again, if we'd hear some voices from the mainstream republicans in the country, particularly business, it would make it a lot easier for senator mcconnell to come to an agreement, come to part of that agreement. >> sam? >> well, i was going to -- [inaudible] >> go ahead. >> so what's going to happen and then a broad question on how you see the democratic party entering this phase of government versus two years ago or even some of 2011 when the -- [inaudible] >> okay. yep, i'll answer the second question first. i think democrats, we've, you know, why, for instance -- i think we've gotten much better at focusing both our policies and our message on middle class folks. i think we understand the dilemma that the middle -- the middle class, just take a step back. you know, the ameri
that they've got to resolve, peggy. and i don't know whether they can. i keep hearing, look, mitch mcconnell is going to be up in two years. lamar alexander is going to be up in two years. saxby chandler is going to be up in two years. can those guys afford to sign on to tax increases? are they then going to face primaries like dig lugar and other people. that's the tension in the party. >> the republicans keep having primaryite, they are regular go to keep losing and they will not be immune. they will continue losing their country. >> they will keep having primary-itis as long as the tea party occupies a big swath of the republican base. and the tea party, while very help envelope 2010, has always opinion more a sign of dysfunction in the house than a help. you don't have the party splitting-- the electorate being dragged kicking and screaming to the right if things are going well. the republicans would control the senate now but for the tea party. >> but they wouldn't have the house. and that's what makes a difference. >> and that's why i think-- >> the energy and dynamic-- >> that's their
and mitch mcconnell says they are open to overall tax reform. the speaker says he's open to getting revenue from the tax system. but he says as far as rates are concerned, increase of tax rates, which is the white house wants they are not open to that. they say the election did not create a consensus for that. also a little bit of information as far as who is going to be negotiating this thing. treasury secretary geithner says the white house will be on at least through the inauguration. back to you. liz: rich, any word because you know the republicans did pass on $1 of tax hikes for $10 of spending cuts. would they revisit that? is anybody talking about that? rich: they are not talking specific numbers yet. this is so early in the negotiations. house speaker boehner says i don't want to box us in. i don't want to box the white house in. we need to start the talks first. liz: rich edson. 40 minutes before the closing bell rings. president obama says he's serious about tackling the debt problem. he's even reaching out to big bank executives. getting their ideas. charlie gasparino has the exc
't even pass the house. >> on brightbart.com, mitch mcconnell piled on. i know some people out there think tuesday's results mean republicans in washington are now going to roll over and agree to democrat demands that we hike taxes before the end of the year. i'm here to tell them that there is no truth to that notion whatsoever, end quote. president obama campaigned on raising taxes of the wealthiest americans. his favorite line, we must all pay or faur shair share, even t taxing the wealthy won't solve the debt crisis. what does this all mean? we take our cue from "the prois price is right." that's right. because of this tire d argument we could fall off the much talked about fiscal cliff. we're waiting. cop on, mr. yodeler. we should have started this sooner. you get the picture. talk back today, should obama or republicans blink on taxes? facebook.com/carolcnn. facebook.com/carolcnn. your responses later this hour. >>> the ballots in florida not all counted yet. some of the races are coming down to the wire. will this act of florida's election history go so very wrong? the potential of
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 63 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)